Virtual communities


Published on

Published in: Technology, Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Virtual communities

  1. 1. Mikayla Tucker-Davis COM 210
  2. 2. • Where large numbers of people that shared a common interest, concern, or experience would interact with one another online. • Also known as subgroups. • Before the Web, virtual communities existed on bulletin board services and many still do. • There are two kinds of communication among virtual community members: message postings and real-time chat
  3. 3. • Virtual communities became popular in the 1990’s back then titled “online communities” • According to PEW Research Center (2001) “84% of Internet users, or about 90 million Americans, say they have used the Internet to contact or get information from a group.” • The first commercial entity to find success in online communities was AOL.
  4. 4. • “Various studies have demonstrated that the function of online virtual groups is to provide social and emotional support to their members.” (Shoham, S., & Heber, M. 2012). • Groups online are categorized into categories that the members or its sponsors have in common interest. • The groupings have no exclusive characterization but they do represent a shared interest all communities are linked by a time, place, or
  5. 5. • They allow individuals to establish a new identity. • When one joins an online community people get to choose who they want to be and the things that will distinguish them from other members. • Another thing that people benefit from while being online is anonymity. • The anonymous nature is another major reason why people are drawn into online societies because they are a judgment free zone. • Not being able to attach users to a face and a name gives people the chance to say what they openly and freely • In society today it is hard to be one’s self out of fear of
  6. 6. • Virtual society brings is that it interferes with social interaction because some users become so comfortable in that world that they never want to go back to reality. • This faceless realm allows for people who are shy to open up online but then they still forget how to do that once back into society. • Not being able to recognize the tone of someone’s voice/body language can often cause communication issues in the online communities. • Creates a gray area when it comes to face-to-face interaction • Cyberspace can be a way to solving their shyness but then again it is not a complete resolution.
  7. 7. Watch Link Below:
  8. 8. • Virtual communities will always play an important role in today’s society and its future for better or worse. • The same thing that draws users into cyberspace is the same thing that also is a drawback and that being anonymity. • They give those who want a place to belong the option if they cannot find it in the reality of society. • Even though it comes with benefits and negatives as time goes on the development of online communities will eventually evolve.
  9. 9. • Online Communities Research Paper: p=sharing • Berg, R. (2012). The Anonymity Factor in Making Multicultural Teams Work: Virtual and Real Teams. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 404-424. doi:10.1177/1080569912453480 • Shoham, S., & Heber, M. (2012). Characteristics of a Virtual Community for Individuals Who Are d/Deaf and Hard of Hearing. American Annals Of The Deaf, 157(3), 251-263. • Rosenberry, J. (2010). VIRTUAL COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR OFFLINE COMMUNITIES THROUGH ONLINE NEWSPAPER MESSAGE FORUMS. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 87(1), 154-169. • Simpson, B. (2011). What happens online stays online? Virtual punishment in the real world. Information & Communications Technology Law, 20(1), 3-17. doi:10.1080/13600834.2011.557494 • James, C. A. (2011). Communication in online fan communities: The ethics of intimate strangers. Empedocles: European Journal For The Philosophy Of Communication, 2(2), 279-289. doi:10.1386/ejpc.2.2.279_1 • Romm, C., Pliskin, N., & Clarke, R. (1997). Virtual communities and society: toward an integrative three phase model. International journal of information management, 17(4), 261-270. • Blanchard, A., & Horan, T. (1998). Virtual communities and social capital. Social science computer review, 16(3), 293-307. • Ridings, C. M., Gefen, D., & Arinze, B. (2002). Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3), 271-295. • Masters , A. (2011, 09 11). [Web log message]. Retrieved from